To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Welcome protection scheme
Share this:
However, it highlighted two areas in which the Island might, at the time of publication, have been found wanting. One concerned a financial ombudsman, a matter now in hand. The other concerned a protection scheme for investors, which, after a lengthy States debate at the end of last week, we shall now have.
Traditionally, it was felt that our financial services industry required no depositor protection safety net because our financial institutions were so sound in strength and depth. Just how dangerous that assumption might have proved was demonstrated in the Isle of Man and Guernsey, where, all too recently, banks failed and investors were left wondering where their hard-earned cash had gone.
Those collapses were exceptional, but the present global financial crisis has taught anyone willing to learn a lesson that the unthinkable can and does occur. Economic Development Minister Alan Maclean might still be confident that the new protection scheme will ever be needed, but many people inside and outside the Island will be more than content to see it in place.
It can be argued that, as in so many other areas of life, investors should bear in mind the axiom ‘let the buyer beware’ while simultaneously remembering that the world is an uncertain and unpredictable place. If, on the other hand, measures that remove at least some of the riskiness from investment – especially with the small investor in mind – can be introduced, so much the better.
With a limit on an individual’s protection of £50,000 and a cap on the scheme of £100 million – £35 million guaranteed by the States and the rest by financial institutions – there will still be scope for substantial losses, but it would clearly have been unrealistic to have opted for open-ended compensation. It can, moreover, be argued that the £50,000 limit is calculated to target those who are likely to be hardest hit by a financial collapse – those with a moderate amount of money invested with a single institution.
Meanwhile, although many of the investment decisions involving Jersey are of a corporate nature and do not directly involve private individuals placing money here, the introduction of the new scheme will undoubtedly enhance our image. Such schemes are increasingly seen as essential features of any modern, responsible, well-regulated financial centre.
Related
Most read this week...
More from the JEP
Action taken after safety concerns at St Brelade care home
Charting why Jersey has rocks, reefs … and fantasy islands
“If I had not had a PSA test, I do not even know if I would be around”
Island surges up the search charts in national media survey